Upcoming Council vote

BA ba at pep-project.org
Mon Feb 15 21:05:34 UTC 2016


Dear Gerv,

I could not fathom, from your December e-mail, that the TB Council would not make a public call for volunteers or nominations. Sorry about that.
What I do not understand is, where you see this big difference in effort with respect to what you call major governance reorganization:

Current process:
a. Current council selects individuals to form the new council.
b. This group is presented as an all OR nothing election.
c. Everyone votes YES/NO

versus

Fully transparent and open process:
a. Post a call for nominations and volunteers on TB planning
b. Present a list of X candidates for an election of 9 positions
c. Everyone votes for 9 people of their choice

I think the only difference in effort between the 2 processes is about 15 more minutes in vote counting for the second process, and that would give the new TB council full transparency and legitimacy going forward and not allow any room for criticism.

Hence I do not understand what would lead us to chose the first process, which in addition has the big downside of creating a huge mess if the list is voted down. This outcome is avoided in the second process, because you will always have the people with the highest votes in place to carry on.

With that I rest my case.

Kind regards,
-B
—
Berna Alp, p≡p project
ba at pep-project.org <mailto:ba at pep-project.org>



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/tb-planning/attachments/20160215/f094e2c5/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 842 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/tb-planning/attachments/20160215/f094e2c5/attachment-0001.sig>


More information about the tb-planning mailing list